Wanted: Honest intelligent productive thinking to resolve the issue God exists or not.

a reply to: Itisnowagain

That’s not original sin...
The rest nonsensical
And I know what I am
Not convinced?
I don’t agree with you and that destroys any possibility of you being right...

a reply to: 5StarOracle

originally posted by: Itisnowagain
a reply to: 5StarOracle

If everything is the same. Why do you keep posting different videos from YouTube, and using other people’s work?

a reply to: neutronflux

Sorry I can't remember stating that 'everything is the same'.......can you post where I said it so I can see it in context please?

a reply to: ServantOfTheLamb
Is life made of language?

The map is not the territory. Alfred Korzybski.
The menu is not the meal. Alan Watts.

Dear everyone, I notice that Phage has not answered my question to him, see below.

Will you anyone answer my question to him, because I want to know and learn from you all – and see whether you all do undertake honest intelligent and productive thinking and writing.

originally posted by: Pachomius
posted on Jul, 12 2020 @ 05:28 PM

Dear Phage, why do you choose what I call the passive third person anonymous kind of a sentence in this line from you, "The issue will never be resolved."

Suppose you just write: "Man will never resolve the issue [God exists or not]."

Or "We will never resolve the issue [God exists or not]."

Or "You will never resolve the issue [God exists or not]."

www.abovetopsecret.com...

originally posted by: Phage
posted on Jul, 12 2020 @ 01:54 PM

Dear Pachomius,

The issue will never be resolved. It is up to you to make your own choice in the matter.
www.abovetopsecret.com...

a reply to: Pachomius

Cause nobody cares. Faith is a personal matter based on individuals’ experiences, needs, spiritual talent’s. With individuals’ belief based on evidence that is different from person to person. And exclusive to individuals own perceptions.

And nobody wants to box their God in with your religious and dogmatic definition. When they already walk, have a personal relationship, spiritual relationship with their God.

If you are so one dimensional than god can be captured in a short definition that has nothing to do with evidence, or a spiritual relationship with the forces that created the universe. Go with it.

But stop being so critical of those that are more in tune with the creator of the universe, have a sense of what stems from the creator, those that have faith, and a personal relationship.

That is what I call a branded religion, and it can and does lead to violence against folks attached to their own branded religion.

originally posted by: Pachomius

Dear everyone, I notice that Phage has not answered my question to him, see below.

Will you anyone answer my question to him, because I want to know and learn from you all – and see whether you all do undertake honest intelligent and productive thinking and writing.

Dear Phage, why do you choose what I call the passive third person anonymous kind of a sentence in this line from you, "The issue will never be resolved."

Suppose you just write: "Man will never resolve the issue [God exists or not]."

Or "We will never resolve the issue [God exists or not]."

Or "You will never resolve the issue [God exists or not]."



[quote starts]
originally posted by: Pachomius
posted on Jul, 12 2020 @ 05:28 PM

Dear Phage, why do you choose what I call the passive third person anonymous kind of a sentence in this line from you, "The issue will never be resolved."

Suppose you just write: "Man will never resolve the issue [God exists or not]."

Or "We will never resolve the issue [God exists or not]."

Or "You will never resolve the issue [God exists or not]."

www.abovetopsecret.com...
[quote ends]

[quote starts]
originally posted by: Phage
posted on Jul, 12 2020 @ 01:54 PM

Dear Pachomius,

The issue will never be resolved. It is up to you to make your own choice in the matter.
www.abovetopsecret.com...
[quote ends]


[end of post]

originally posted by: Pachomius
That is what I call a branded religion, and it can and does lead to violence against folks attached to their own branded religion.

Then what do you call this....

originally posted by: neutronflux
a reply to: Pachomius

You

and that naughty atheists

Why are atheists naughty? You, yourself said your god is neither good nor evil? So your bringIng religion into this again? Don’t you try to banned “religious” people from this thread? But yet, you have not removed yourself from this thread?

and that naughty atheists who should know better were they into honest intelligent productive thinking and writing,

You, yourself said your god doesn’t require worship. Why bother believing? What is the punishment of an atheist who only believes in the natural process of creation verified by the scientific method, not the intellect behind creation? What makes an atheist naughty. Do you think they should be spanked? Strange?



Why would anyone bother to believe in your god? When your god doesn’t seem to have time for his creation. It’s like your god farted everything into existence, and then left the dimension?


—————-

If you had any integrity, you would hold yourself to the same standards you hold everyone else. And banned yourself from posting because you resorted to “religion”.

a reply to: Pachomius

Your the only one here calling atheists “naughty”

I believe people should live free in their own beliefs.

And could care less what an atheists believes. And I have a feeling the spiritual people on this thread you label “religious” also feel atheists are free to practice their none belief.

It seems your the “religious” one.

I just want to know and learn from others here.



The use of what I call the passive third person anonymous kind of a sentence is quite common.


It seems to me that the user of the passive third person anonymous sentence is into wishy-washy thinking and writing.


From my part instead of saying, "The issue [God exists or not] will be resolved," I will say:

"I submit on the issue [God exists or not] we will resolve it, by the systematic procedure of honest intelligent productive thinking."


So, system requires that we first work as to concur on the concept of God.



What do you say, dear colleagues here?

Dear my colleagues here, beware of sticking to only the second objective of education.

That is typical of folks with a branded religion.

These domains of learning are the cognitive (thinking), the affective (social/emotional/feeling), and the psychomotor (physical/kinesthetic) domain, and each one of these has a taxonomy associated with it.

Google:
taxonomy of educational objectives cognitive, affective and psychomotor

a reply to: Pachomius

Really. People post their personal experiences, then you poo poo over their personal experiences by falsely labeling them “religion”.

Below is what you posted on page 4 after about 50 post in with individuals gave their honest answer and heart felt replies.

originally posted by: Pachomius
This is the title of the thread:

Wanted: Honest intelligent productive thinking to resolve the issue God exists or not.


And the OP is as follows:

posted on Jun, 25 2020 @ 01:12 PM

On the assumption that mankind sincerely seeks knowledge, I submit that it is possible for any person to come to resolve the issue God exists or not, with honest intelligent productive thinking, i.e., thinking on truths, facts, logic, and the history of ideas. Now, honest intelligent productive thinking on the said issue must start with working together to concur on the concept of God. What do you dear colleagues here say?

Thanks for your replies, but not one of you have a definition of the English word, God.

Here is my definition of God:

"God in concept is the creator cause of man and the universe and everything with a beginning."


I see that you all wrongly conflate God with religion, you can have religion without God.

And you can have God without religion.

Then your the one that starts to post about “naughty” atheists.

Your full of crap.

a reply to: Pachomius

So? What is the definition of religion?

To me, religion is the “thou shalt nots” for example.

To you. It seems to be anyone’s experience or perspective you don’t like. How convenient for you.

originally posted by: neutronflux
a reply to: Pachomius

So? What is the definition of religion?

To me, religion is the “thou shalt nots” for example.

Love God and Love Eachother

First and before anything else, guys with a branded religion, they are after favors from their branded God, in particular ultimately to get to heaven and avoid hell, like neutronflux, and while they await getting to heaven, they worship their branded God to get rich, powerful, and very vain with their being holy holy.

They don't really go for God, in concept as the creator cause of man and the universe and everything with a beginning.

They worship even the rabbit's foot.


Otherwise, it is all anger, hatred, and envy for folks who don't share their branded God in their branded religion which they call faith.

Is life made of language?

The map is not the territory. Alfred Korzybski.
The menu is not the meal. Alan Watts.

a reply to: Itisnowagain

Do any of these sentences mean anything about reality? If so, how do we make them meaningful in a world where distinction isn't real? How am I to make sense of the question, "is life made of language" without drawing distinctions between life and language? How am I to understand that the menu is not the meal,unless the meal and the menu are really two and not one? How am I to understand the map is not the territory, unless the map and the territory are two and not one? Your metaphysic is illogical. Wake up.

originally posted by: Pachomius
First and before anything else, guys with a branded religion, they are after favors from their branded God, in particular ultimately to get to heaven and avoid hell, like neutronflux, and while they await getting to heaven, they worship their branded God to get rich, powerful, and very vain with their being holy holy.

They don't really go for God, in concept as the creator cause of man and the universe and everything with a beginning.

They worship even the rabbit's foot.


Otherwise, it is all anger, hatred, and envy for folks who don't share their branded God in their branded religion which they call faith.

Yea. Please cite the posts that mentioned heaven, hell, being rewarded, and or a specific deity in the first 50 posts. Before you made this claim on page 4?

I see that you all wrongly conflate God with religion, you can have religion without God.

Such false arguments by you...

I have now the idea that existence is the path to the existence of God.


But it is not really my idea now, I have been saying that since way way back here.



I said that existence is co-extensive with God, in concept as the creator cause of man and the universe and everything with a beginning.


Except for the fact that though God and existence are co-extensive, God is the master in charge and in control of existence and existence is the substance of God.


Does that mean that all things in existence like babies and roses and the nose on our face, we are made of the substance of God?

Of course yes.


Why, you anyone here have any problem with that? Let me hear or read about your problem, okay?



I tell you all, now I have another descriptive name for my kind of a cognitor [think cognition] i.e. knower of God existing, in concept as the creator cause of man and the universe and everything with a beginning: I now call myself an existist.

And what is my concept of an existist?

An existist is a person who knows God exists from the fact that he the cognitor exists.


Thus I proclaim, I exist therefore God exists.

That means I am the evidence of God existing, just as I say I exist therefore my papa and mama exist.


How do you anyone here, rebut my latest argument for God existing, namely:

I exist therefore God exists, in concept as the creator cause of man and the universe and everything with a beginning.